Cultural and linguistic minorities can be hard to survey either as the target population of interest or as a subpopulation of a general population survey. The challenges associated with studying these minorities are important to understand in order to assess and address the survey error that can be introduced when designing and implementing studies that include these groups. This chapter begins with a description of what constitutes cultural and linguistic minorities, based on a systematic review of the literature (see Chapter 5 in this volume, for a complete description of the process). We note that the literature in this area is largely limited to research among cultural and linguistic minorities in the context of Western and industrialized countries. Therefore, we supplement this literature by drawing upon our own experience and discussions with colleagues who conduct research among cultural and linguistic minorities in other parts of the world. This review is followed by a discussion of the potential challenges faced by researchers interested in surveying cultural and linguistic minorities and approaches taken to address these challenges in the areas of sampling, questionnaire development, adaptation and translation, pretesting, and data collection. We then discuss additional approaches to studying these hard-to-survey populations including qualitative, mixed-methods, and community-based research methods and how these can complement survey methods. The concluding section addresses needed improvements in the documentation and development of research methods to expand solutions and increase the quality of hard-to-survey cultural and linguistic minority research. Defining cultural and linguistic minoritiesThis section sets out the key features of cultural and linguistic minorities. Three core concepts are defined and discussed. First, we define minority populations followed by a discussion of linguistic and cultural minorities. The distinct concept of hard-to-survey is also relevant and discussed in this context (also see Chapter 1 in this volume). On the one hand, it is a relatively straightforward task to define these concepts; however, as we discuss below, applying these definitions in a survey context is far more complicated. Formal definitions serve as a good starting point for this discussion, however. 245https:/www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.

In the wake of marriage equality for same-sex couples, many states have introduced and passed laws that provide religious exemptions for certain services and benefits for LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer) persons. The authors use data from a general population survey of Nebraskans as a mixed-methods case study to examine public opinion of religious freedom laws. Drawing on data from both closed-ended ( n = 1,117) and open-ended ( n = 838) questions, the authors show that opposition to religious freedom laws is quite high, as 64 percent of respondents report that they oppose laws that would allow business owners to deny services to gay men and lesbians. The authors outline how both sides rely on frameworks that are foundational to the American experience: the protection of rights and the capitalist economy. The authors argue that these appeals to broad American values underscore why these bills will continue to be introduced and seen as controversial despite low levels of support.

Web surveys permit researchers to use graphic or symbolic elements alongside the text of response options to help respondents process the categories. Smiley faces are one example used to communicate positive and negative domains. How respondents visually process these smiley faces, including whether they detract from the question's text, is understudied. We report the results of two eyetracking experiments in which satisfaction questions were asked with and without smiley faces. Respondents to the questions with smiley faces spent less time reading the question stem and response option text than respondents to the questions without smiley faces, but the response distributions did not differ by version. We also find support that lower literacy respondents rely more on the smiley faces than higher literacy respondents.

Following Obergefell v. Hodges, same-sex marriage remains controversial and anti-LGBT state legislation has been passed, which raises questions about whether the Supreme Court's ruling may have created a backlash. We use data from two waves of a general population survey of Nebraskans conducted before and after the decision to answer three questions. First, we test three theories of how the Court decision influenced public opinion. We find that support for same-sex marriage was significantly higher following the ruling, suggesting that there was not a backlash to it. Second, we assess whether people perceive that the court accurately reflects the public's opinion. We find that people who favor same-sex marriage are more likely to think that the ruling refects public opinion very well; those who oppose same-sex marriage are more likely to think that the ruling does not at all reflect public opinion. Third, we examine the association between discussing gay rights and support for same-sex marriage, finding that those who talk about LGB issues very often are more likely to favor same-sex marriage. We discuss the implications of these findings in relation to two of the themes of this special issue: the influence of marriage equality on Americans' understandings of marriage and the impact of marriage equality on future LGBT activism.

Household surveys are increasingly moving toward self-administered modes of data collection. To maintain a probability sample of the population, researchers must use probability methods to select adults within households. However, very little experimental methodological work has been conducted on within-household selection in mail surveys. In this study, we experimentally examine four methods-the next-birthday method, the last-birthday method, selection of the youngest adult in the household, and selection of the oldest adult in the household-in two mail surveys of Nebraska residents (n = 2,498, AAPOR RR1 36.3 percent, and n = 947, AAPOR RR1 31.6 percent). To evaluate how accurately respondents were selected from among all adults in the household, we also included a household roster in the questionnaire for one of the surveys. We evaluated response rates, the completed sample composition resulting from the different within-household selection methods, and the accuracy of within-household selection. The analyses indicate that key demographics differed little across the selection methods, and that all of the within-household selection methods tend to underrepresent key demographic groups such as Hispanics and persons with lower levels of education. Rates of selection accuracy were low among the four selection methods analyzed, and the rates were similar across all four methods.